Merlin D. LindemannUniversity of Kentucky, Lexington
February 2, 2018
IPPE - Atlanta
• Global food demand
• Value of animal protein in our diet
• Rendered products (discussing primarily protein)
– A perspective of progress
– Least cost formulation
– ? New opportunities
3
Adapted from Table 2.4 in FAO (2006)
Population data and projections
Population (million) Growth rates, % per annum
2015 2030 2050 1970-2000 2000-2050
World (UN) 7,197 8,130 8,919
World (countries with FBS) 7,166 8,091 8,871 1.7 0.8
Developing countries 5,802 6,709 7,509 2.0 0.9
South Asia 1,685 1,972 2,208 2.2 1.0
East Asia 2,119 2,256 2,256 1.5 0.4
Industrial Countries 965 1,003 1,019 0.7 0.2
Transition Countries 399 380 343 0.5 -0.4
4Adapted from Table 2.4 in FAO (2006)
0
1500
3000
4500
6000
7500
9000
1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050
mill
ion
Year
World (UN) Developing countries South Asia
East Asia Industrial Countries Transition Countries
• “A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity. An optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.”
-Winston Churchill-
5
kg/person/year 1969/71 1999/01 2030 2050
Cereals, food 148.7 165.4 165 162
Roots and tubers 83.7 69.4 75 75
Vegetable oils and oilseeds (oil eq.) 6.8 12.0 16 17
Meat (carcass weight) 26.1 37.4 47 52
Milk and dairy (fresh milk eq.) 1 75.3 78.3 92 100
Total food (kcal/person/day) 2,411 2,789 3,040 3,130
6
World
1 Butter is excluded.
Adapted from Table 2.7 and 2.8 in FAO (2006)
kg/person/year 1969/71 1999/01 2030 2050
Cereals, food 152.2 186.7 176 162
Roots and tubers 96.6 65.8 61 53
Vegetable oils and oilseeds (oil eq.) 3.5 10.6 15 17
Meat (carcass weight) 9.2 39.8 62 73
Milk and dairy (fresh milk eq.) 1 3.7 11.3 21 24
Total food (kcal/person/day) 2,012 2,872 3,190 3,230
7
East Asia
Adapted from Table 2.7 and 2.8 in FAO (2006)
1 Butter is excluded.
8
Adapted from Table 3.7 in FAO (2006)
Production Consumption
1999/2001 1999/2001
1000 tonnes
Bovine 59,378 58,549
Ovine 11,337 11,187
Pig meat 90,666 90,818
Poultry meat 68,331 67,447
Total meat 229,713 228,000
World
9Adapted from Table 3.7 in FAO (2006)
Production Consumption
1999/2001 1999/2001
1000 tonnes
Bovine 29,364 29,239
Ovine 7,865 8,102
Pig meat 52,646 53,053
-excl. China 12,133 12,777
Poultry meat 35,591 36,053
Total meat 125,466 126,447
-excl. China 65,168 66,857
-excl. China and Brazil 49,805 53,314
Developing countries
A growing population –that desires animal protein!
• Global food demand
• Value of animal protein in our diet
• Rendered products (discussing primarily protein)
– A perspective of progress
– Least cost formulation
– ? New opportunities
12
Is
“Change in the Commodity Composition of Food”
important
for society?
• Children with meat supplement had greater gains on Raven’s Progressive Matrices than all other groups (no impact of energy and milk). 13
Raven’s Scores by Group Over Time
• Study in rural Kenya with 555 children (age 6).
• 4 feeding interventions (21 mo) and cognitive tests.
Whaley et al., 2003
• Decreased cognitive function and diminishedlearning ability affect the productivity, not onlyof individuals, but collectively, of societies andwhole nations, particularly in the developingworld and among disadvantaged communitiesin the affluent nations.
• Animal source foods of a wide variety providerich sources of complete protein, energy, andan array of micronutrients that are oftenlimiting in the diet.
• Maternal intake of animal source foods duringpregnancy is positively associated with infantgrowth beginning in utero.
• In Kenya, overall maternal energy intake and intakeof animal protein during pregnancy were majorfactors that predicted pregnancy weight gain, birthweight, and birth length.
• Also in the Kenyan toddlers, intake of animalprotein was further associated with a higher level ofverbalization and more symbolic play, which are feltto be predictive of future cognitive performance.
"There have been sufficient studies clearlyshowing that when women avoid all animalfoods, their babies are born small, they growvery slowly and they are developmentallyretarded, possibly permanently,"
• Growth• Cognitive development• Depression
• Less understanding about food production
• Concerns about food and feed safety
18
• Many consumers in urban/city locations
– less connected to food production.
– have never produced any food themselves.
• Limited understanding of issues related to…
– Food production and farms
– Food transport and delivery
from farm to table
19
• More consumer concerns about food safety
– Food industry in the U.S. and much of the world have been concerned about food safety.
• All participants in the food production chains
– Active in producing a safe food
– Active in communicating to the consumer that they are active in safe food production
20
• Safe food starts with safe feed
• AFIA - American Feed Industry Association
(www.safefeedsafefood.org)
• FEFANA - Feed Additives and Premixtures Association
(www.fefana.org)
• CVM within FDA - Center for Veterinary Medicine
(the Animal Feed Safety System)
• ISO - International Organization for Standardization
21
• Global food demand
• Value of animal protein in our diet
• Rendered products (discussing primarily protein)
– A perspective of progress
– Least cost formulation
– ? New opportunities
• One-third to one-half of the weight of food production
animals is not consumed by humans.
• Primary products: Meat and bone meal, meat meal, poultry
meal, hydrolyzed feather meal, blood meal, fish meal, and
animal fats.
• The primary products of rendering are feed ingredients for
livestock, poultry, aquaculture, and pet-food industries.
• Good source of digestible amino acids.
• Good source of phosphorous and is highly
available.
• Source for metabolizable energy
• Can reduce cost in diet formulation.
• Can improve foot pad quality in meat birds.
• Least cost formulation (LCF) constraints– Energy– Selected amino acids– Ca, P
• Further considerations of LCF:– Digestibility of amino acids– Digestibility of phosphorus / phytase– Mins/maxs of nutrients and ingredients
Protein Source Millions Metric Tons Percent
Soybean meal 114.9 67
Cottonseed meal 11.2 6
Rapeseed meal 21.4 12
Sunflower meal 9.6 5
Copra meal 1.8 1
Palm kernel meal 3.6 2
Peanut meal 5.4 3
Fish meal 6.1 4
Total 173.9 100
Soy Stats (2001)
Component Soybean meal
Meat and bone meal Meat meal Blood meal
(Spray dried)Plasma meal (Spray dried)
DM 89.98 95.16 96.12 93.23 91.97
Protein 47.73 50.05 56.40 88.65 77.84
Lysine 2.96 2.59 3.20 8.60 6.90
Threonine 1.86 1.63 0.40 4.36 4.47
Methionine 0.66 0.69 0.83 1.18 0.79
Cysteine 0.70 0.46 0.56 1.26 2.60
Tryptophan 0.66 0.30 1.89 1.34 1.41
Isoleucine 2.14 1.47 1.82 0.97 2.69
Valine 2.23 2.19 2.61 7.96 5.12
Calcium 0.33 10.94 6.37 0.05 0.13
Phosphorus 0.71 5.26 3.16 0.21 1.28
NRC (2012)
• Least cost formulation (LCF) constraints– Energy– Selected amino acids– Ca, P
• Further considerations of LCF:– Digestibility of amino acids– Digestibility of phosphorus / phytase– Mins/maxs of nutrients and ingredients
Total Tract Digestibility
IlealDigestibility
Amino acid 1984 1989 1990 1992 2001
Lysine, % 65 70 78 84 87
Threonine, % 62 64 72 83 86
Tryptophan, % – 54 65 83 88
Methionine, % 82 – 86 85 88
Meeker and Meisinger (2015)
31Meeker and Hamilton, 2006.
0.00
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
LowTemp
HighTemp
LowTemp
HighTemp
LowTemp
HighTemp
0.84 0.810.89 0.87
0.810.77
Lysine Methionine Threonine
Wang and Parsons (1998) from Dozier (2015)
0.00
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
0.679
0.822
0.919
0.758
0.8670.919
Low Avg High
Lysine
Low Avg High
Methionine
Wang and Parsons (1998) from Dozier (2015)
32 Commercial Meat and Bone Meal Samples
Amino acid Soybean meal
Meat and bone meal Meat meal Blood meal
(Spray dried)Plasma meal (Spray dried)
Lysine 89 73 78 93 87
Threonine 85 69 74 87 80
Methionine 90 84 82 88 84
Cysteine 84 56 62 86 85
Tryptophan 91 62 76 91 92
Isoleucine 89 73 78 73 85
Valine 87 76 76 92 82
NRC (2012)
• Least cost formulation (LCF) constraints– Energy– Selected amino acids– Ca, P
• Further considerations of LCF:– Digestibility of amino acids– Digestibility of phosphorus / phytase– Mins/maxs of nutrients and ingredients
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
Corn SBM Wheat PBM
0.20
0.40
0.24
0.000.08
0.220.13
1.70
%
Phytate
nPP
• All plant and animal feed ingredients have phosphorus
– Non-phytate phosphorus (nPP)
– Phytate phosphorus
NRC 1994
From Dozier (2015)
• Least cost formulation (LCF) constraints– Energy– Selected amino acids– Ca, P
• Further considerations of LCF:– Digestibility of amino acids– Digestibility of phosphorus / phytase– Mins/maxs of nutrients and ingredients
Executive Summary
• Presence of animal proteins is in keeping with chickens’
natural behaviour
• MBM contributes important functional nutrients that are
present at only low levels in vegetable protein meals
• All-vegetable protein diets result in significantly worse
welfare outcomes for broilers in the form of pododermatitis
• Removing MBM from Australian broiler diets, even at the
historically low levels currently used, could cost the industry
over AUS$7.5 million annually.
Kenneth Bruerton
39
40
• Sweet• Sour• Salty• Bitter• Savory (umami; described
as brothy or meaty)
• By-product of meat packing industry• Improve growth performance of weanling pigs
• High concentrations of lysine, tryptophan, and threonine• Enhance dietary palatability• Maintain intestinal health through immunoglobulin
• Expensive
Item Daily gain Daily feed intake Feed/gain
No. of experiments 79 79 79
No. of experiments with positive response 70 70 42
% of experiments with positive response 89 89 53
% of overall response 25 21 4
(Coffey and Cromwell, 2001)
• Summary of 79 experiments (8,448 pigs) weaned at an average of 19.7 days of age and averaging 5.8 kg.• Average test period was 15 days. Average level of plasma in diets was 7%.
ΔA
DF
I, g
/d
1 w k p o s tw e an in g 2 w k p o s tw e an in g0
2 0
4 0
6 0
1 0 t o 1 7 d 1 8 t o 2 4 d 2 5 t o 3 2 d
Weaning age
30
57
17
22
4642
*ΔADFI: ADFI improvement of SPDD diets over control dietsData from 75 trials involving over 12,000 piglets
*
(Torrallardona, 2010)
AD
FI,
kg
/d
P a r ity 1 P a r ity 2 > P a r ity 24 .0
4 .5
5 .0
5 .5
6 .0
6 .5
La
cta
tio
n A
DF
I, k
g/d
≤ P a r ity 3 > P a r ity 35 .0
5 .5
6 .0
6 .5
7 .0
C o n tro l 0 .5 % S D P P
4.50
5.03
5.30
5.68
5.985.79
6.11
5.45
6.18
6.58
*
*
*(Crenshaw, 2007) (Frugé, 2009)
Control diet: Sorghum-Corn-SBM diet Control diet: Corn-SBM diet
AD
FI,
g
d 0 to 1 4 d 1 4 to 2 8 d 0 to 2 82 0 0
4 0 0
6 0 0
8 0 0
AD
FI,
g
d 0 to 1 4 d 1 4 to 3 5 d 0 to 3 5
2 0 0
4 0 0
6 0 0
8 0 0
(Bregendahl et al., 1999)(Jones et al., 2010)
• Weaned at d 21 • Weaned at d 11 to 14
• DPS is a by-product of the heparin extraction from pig intestines
• Control pigs were fed corn-SBM-dried whey based diets without DPS
245
831749
581 554
222
366
720 723
525 554
331
C o n t r o l 3 .5 % D P S C o n tr o l 5 .0 % D P S
*
• Preference test• Two feeders per pen, rotate feeder location 3x/week
Per
cen
tag
e co
nsu
mp
tio
n,
%
d 1 to 3 d 4 to 7 d 8 to 1 4 d 1 5 to 2 10
2 0
4 0
6 0
8 0
1 0 0
47.652.4
26.2
73.8
18.6
81.081.4
19.0
* * *
Per
cen
tag
e co
nsu
mp
tio
n,
%
d 1 to 3 d 4 to 7 d 8 to 1 4 d 1 5 to 2 10
2 0
4 0
6 0
8 0
49.1 50.945.5
54.561.4
34.238.6
65.8
* *
C o n tr o l 2 .5 % D P S
(Cho et al., 2010)
2 .5 % D P S 5 .0 % D P S
• Potential alternative to SDPPP
erce
nta
ge
con
sum
pti
on
, %
d 1 to 3 d 4 to 7 d 8 to 1 4 d 1 5 to 2 1 d 2 2 to 2 70
2 0
4 0
6 0
8 0
32.8
67.2
43.9
56.1
39.8
68.4
60.2
31.6
26.5
73.5
5 .0 % S D P P 2 .5 % S D P P + 2 .5 % D P S
(Cho et al., 2010)
**
AD
FI,
kg/
d
d 0 to 9 d 1 0 to 1 8 d 0 to w e a n in g (2 1 d )4 .0
5 .0
6 .0
7 .0
8 .0
C o n tr o l 1 .5 % D P S 3 .0 % D P S
5.3
5.8
5.4
6.7
7.2
6.53
7.0
6.036.30
Linear, P < 0.10
Linear, P < 0.10
• Control diet is corn-SBM based lactation diet
(Johnston et al., 2003)
AD
FI,
g/d
C o n tr o l 2 .5 5 .0 7 .5 2 .5 5 .0 7 .53 1 0
3 2 0
3 3 0
3 4 0
3 5 0
3 6 0
C o n tro l
2 .5
5 .0
7 .5
2 .5
5 .0
7 .5
SDBM SDBC
• From 6.6 to 9.9 kg (14 days)• Corn-SBM based diets
340
354 356
350353
323
328
SDBM vs. SDBC, P = 0.09
(DeRouchey et al., 2002)
AD
FI,
g/d
C o n tr o l 1 .5 % S D P P 2 .0 % D P S 1 .5 % E F M9 0 0
9 5 0
1 0 0 0
1 0 5 0
1 1 0 0
• Feather accounts for up to 50 to 70 g/kg of mature chicken• High crude protein level: 80 to 90%• Processed to enhance nutrient bioavailability
• Steam- or enzymatic-hydrolyzation
Effects of enzymatic feather meal (EFM) on feed intake of weanling pigs
946
1082
950
1010
b
a
b
ab C o n tro l
1 .5 % S D P P
2 .0 % D P S
1 .5 % E F M
(Pan et al., 2016)
H F M in c lu s io n ra te , %
Gro
we
r p
ha
se
(2
3 t
o 7
0 k
g)
AD
FI,
kg
/d
0 2 4 6 8 1 0
1 .7 5
1 .8 0
1 .8 5
1 .9 0
H F M in c lu s io n ra te , %
Fin
ish
er
ph
as
e (
70
to
12
0 k
g)
AD
FI,
kg
/d0 2 4 6 8 1 0
2 .3
2 .4
2 .5
2 .6
2 .7
2 .8
0 2 4 6 8 1 0
1.82
1.77
1.83
1.78
1.73 1.73
2.652.59
2.66
2.592.62
2.43
bbc
b
bcb
c
(van Heugten et al., 2002)
• Basal diet is corn-SBM based diet
M B M in c lu s io n ra te , %
Gro
win
g-F
inis
hin
g p
ha
se
(5
0 t
o 1
22
kg
)A
DF
I, k
g/d
0 .0 2 .5 5 .0 7 .5 1 0 .0 1 2 .52 .8
2 .9
3 .0
3 .1
3 .2
0 .0
2 .5
5 .0
7 .5
1 0 .0
1 2 .5
• Source of amino acids, calcium, and phosphorus• Variation in composition and nutritional quality
3.02
3.11
3.05
2.93 2.93 2.93
Linear, P = 0.02
(Gottlob et al., 2004)
A growing population –
that desires animal protein!
Animal protein is an important part of diets that contribute to individual and societal wellbeing!
A strong and growing animal industry supplies product to, and a market for, the rendering industry!